The iMac Pro is a marketing machine.

[Dave245]

As much as I agree with the first part of your statement, I don't reach the same conclusion. Perhaps you don't know the full story. Apple itself admitted that there is a portion of the Pro market which finds an AIO suitable for their workflow. After all, there are people happy about the tcMP. You are just the other portion which will be addressed by the mMP, like many of us.

Think about it. At the end of the day, you are at the border between the two groups, since you stated you want to compare the machines first, before buying one of them.

Finally: 4.999$, not 6k. And the value of the parts is quite worth it, although I do agree that it doesn't suit the needs of some professionals.

I think you have hit the nail on the head here. You can't please 100% of the people 100% of the time, there are going to be professionals that will love this iMac and do in fact love the iMac as an all in one and those are the people Apple is going after with the iMac Pro, the other professionals who want something different are the reason why Apple are working on a new Mac Pro.

As for price I think people forget that these professionals will not have a problem paying for the power, also your getting a great 5K display.

 

[RuffDraft]

I think you have hit the nail on the head here. You can't please 100% of the people 100% of the time, there are going to be professionals that will love this iMac and do in fact love the iMac as an all in one and those are the people Apple is going after with the iMac Pro, the other professionals who want something different are the reason why Apple are working on a new Mac Pro.

As for price I think people forget that these professionals will not have a problem paying for the power, also your getting a great 5K display.

Most definitely. The naysayers will eat their hat. I know a lot of videographers that will jump at this machine with two mits: I'm one of them. I can't wait to update from my 17" MacBook Pro to this 27" iMac Pro. I've maxed out the spec on this 2011 MacBook Pro, but it's struggling of late. I think those who aren't in the need for a Mac will happily wait and compare to whatever the new Mac Pro will look like / cost - I'd have been one of those had I owned a newer Mac. I'm not in that boat, so this serves the best purchase for the next 12 months.

The MacBook Pro with maxed out RAM at 16GB leaves only the iMac and old trashcan to choose from for the highest power users. Considering that alone, power users are contending with a maxed out iMac 27" or they're waiting for the iMac Pro. Given how many votes there are for a new Mac Pro on some websites (for the past few years), you can bet there's a market out there that will eat the iMac Pro up. The improved GPU and better CPUs are only going to add to the reason for users to wait for the iMac Pro.

Day one purchase here. I disagree that it's a marketing machine alone, but it's a great marketing machine on top of being a great Mac.

 

[driftless]

Another Day One Purchaser here. I am a videographer and the iMac hits the sweet spot for me. I am fine with the AIO design as I buy a new iMac at the end of the three year AppleCare, by then there is enough improvement to justify the upgrade.

The configuration that appeals to me is: 10 core, 64GB Ram, 2TB SSD, max GPU.

 

[ECETADave]

I think detractors may not understand the value you get for the money compared to alternatives. I bought a 27 inch 2011 iMac. Not just fully tricked out with max CPU, GPU, etc, but added max RAM and a third party striped RAID SSD. Total cost was $5,000. While it may not compete with tricked out Mac Pros in some cases, 6 years(!) later this computer still blows the doors off of all but the newest high-end iMacs in most tests that I've run. No exaggeration, I help my father-in-law out on his previous model iMac sometimes and it just feels antiquated compared to my older one. Eliminating bottlenecks in the system gives you an outsized increase in performance, and that is what the iMac Pro is spec'd to do. The iMac Pro will be $5,000, but the performance difference between it and the iMac will be significant, and many of us will never regret the value for the money.

 

[askunk]

Actual testing on AMD Vega GPU destined for iMac Pro shows significant speed gains over Nvidia Titan Xp

http://appleinsider.com/articles/17...-significant-speed-gains-over-nvidia-titan-xp

 

[bplein]

I may just buy it "because".

I bought my current iMac in early 2013. Over 4 years of awesome service and it's still adequate. Pretty cheap all things considered.

I don't want adequate. I want a step up. I'm willing to drop $5-6k even though I don't use it professionally to earn a living.

Some people buy practical Hondas. Others buy entry level German sports sedans. Others buy top tier sports cars. All of them can get you to work but some do it with higher enjoyment value. None of them are wrong decisions.

Have fun, enjoy your life the way you want.

 

[JVNeumann]

I just ordered the 2017 iMac, but the added cores and potential GPU performance of the iMP (I usually build a separate PC for gaming, but if this thing benchmarks well then I could conceivably consolidate that money into the one machine) is definitely giving me pause. If it launched today I'd probably do it, but I just can't wait until the end of the year. AIO or not, it sounds like a solid machine - provided the thermal situation actually works.

Anyway, I think it's very applicable to larger studios, who understandably don't like to micromanage their machines and would rather just update the entire thing at the end of the warranty period.

 

[Dave245]

I bought my current iMac in early 2013. Over 4 years of awesome service and it's still adequate. Pretty cheap all things considered.

I agree with this, people go on about the cost of Mac's but actually when you get years of great usage with a very reliable MacOS and great hardware it's worth the price, in my opinion anyway.

I currently own a late 2012 iMac and a 2011 MacBook Pro, they both work fine but i know i will upgrade before both machines fail or need to be updated, i know people who have been using Mac's for about 10 years! The iMac Pro i think will be one of those machines that will last years and for people who need that power it will be a great machine.

 

[bplein]

I agree with this, people go on about the cost of Mac's but actually when you get years of great usage with a very reliable MacOS and great hardware it's worth the price, in my opinion anyway.

I concur! I will probably put my 2012 27" up in my wife's office as her desktop. She currently uses both a MacBook Air as a laptop and another older laptop set up as a desktop. I can sunset the old (broken keyboard) lap/desktop, give her my desktop, and go for the iMac Pro. I expect it to be a 5 year system, just dollars per day! (grin)

 

[jclardy]

I would have expected a new chassis with smaller bezels next year (or maybe just bumping the screen to the edges of the current size) but with the iMac pro internal redesign that seems unlikely. I doubt they would release a new $5k all-in-one only to release a much nicer looking version in less than a year.

 

[JVNeumann]

I would have expected a new chassis with smaller bezels next year (or maybe just bumping the screen to the edges of the current size) but with the iMac pro internal redesign that seems unlikely. I doubt they would release a new $5k all-in-one only to release a much nicer looking version in less than a year.

Does anyone know why they didn't update the 2017 iMacs with the new thermal solution the iMP uses? It seems like if they know how to implement a better cooling solution (at least on the 27") then they should have done it. Especially as the chassis would use the same cast/mold.

 

[throAU]

There've been questions about who is the iMac Pro really for, and because it's non-upgradable, people who need a serious workstation will not buy it. While the iMac Pro is a targeted for a specific niche market, I think the truth is that the iMac Pro is made as a marketing stunt.

It can take 128 GB of memory, 18 cores and multiple external thunderbolt connected GPUs? It can connect to multiple SANs via fibre channel or 10 GbE with the appropriate thunderbolt connections.

This whole "it has no slots, therefore it is non upgradeable!" Garbage needs to stop.

It may not be for you, but it certainly is upgradeable. In terms of GPU compute capability, external storage capability, etc. it can be pushed further than a big box Mac Pro.

 

[CWallace]

Does anyone know why they didn't update the 2017 iMacs with the new thermal solution the iMP uses? It seems like if they know how to implement a better cooling solution (at least on the 27") then they should have done it. Especially as the chassis would use the same cast/mold.

It's overkill for the components in the iMac and it would have meant no user-serviceable RAM, which would have caused an absolute riot in this place.

 

[phrehdd]

An iMac Pro would have to be (for the asking price) phenomenal.

1) monitor itself should not only able to be hardware calibrated but include the tools to do it with a slick front end piece of software that allows for certain real world variable adjustments.
2) the iMac Pro will not be form over function and thus, it will be a thicker overall design to allow for the guts within and as important - proper ventilation.
3) ports - none of this single port crap, the Pro will offer 3 TB3, 3 USB3 and 1 USB3.1/C plus typical audio in and out.
4) while this computer will come with an SSD internally, it will also include an external "slot" with cartridge that house an after purchase SSD or 2.5" drive addition.
5) RAM total 32 or 64 gigs
6) Video would come in both flavours - ATI and Nvidia, customer choice and expect a cost difference.

These are some of the things I would want to see.

 

[askunk]

throAU, I agree with you, but don't you think that TB3 is still quite limited in a future standpoint?
40 Gbps is impressive for many applications, but when it comes to high-end GPUs, the buses found on motherboards are much faster. Don't you think that someone who buys an iMP would choose a faster GPU than the included Vega after a few years and find that it can be used with a lower performance than if it were installed in the actual mac?

Nevertheless, the iMP has RAM slots and I think (I might be mistaken) that the CPU is socketed. Not fully expandable in traditional terms, but still there is room for growth if you take into account a higher price and longer times (since I guess the majority of users will rely on service centres to upgrade it, I personally wouldn't risk wrecking the screen).

 

[Nugget]

It can take 128 GB of memory, 18 cores ... This whole "it has no slots, therefore it is non upgradeable!" Garbage needs to stop.

It can be purchased with 128 GB of memory and 18 cores. That's not the same thing as being upgradable.

 

[askunk]

Correction, you are right. I am sorry. RAM won't be upgradeable.

 

[driftless]

I am wondering if it makes sense to upgrade to the 4TB SSD and go without an external scratch drive? I am currently using a late '14 iMac with the 1 TB SSD, a 1 TB LaCie external SSD as a scratch drive, and 2 external HDD's (1 RAID) for storage and back up.

 

[BurgDog]

Correction, you are right. I am sorry. RAM won't be upgradeable.

It will be repairable. SSD and RAM are in sockets. Your Apple Certified IT support group in your business will have no trouble upgrading RAM or SSD if needed. Might be able to upgrade other things as well but so far only RAM and SSD look to be in sockets. If you are an individual you may have to spend some money to get a certified tech to do it for you. Also if a certified tech does the work less chance of warranty voiding damage.

 

[askunk]

Ok, then the article I read stating "Apple confirms RAM is not upgradeable" I guess means just that there is no door to access the slots, but DIMMs are still socketed, not soldered.

 

[BurgDog]

Ok, then the article I read stating "Apple confirms RAM is not upgradeable" I guess means just that there is no door to access the slots, but DIMMs are still socketed, not soldered.

Based on the pictures released so far and existing iMacs being glued together that matches what we know. From the point of view of a purchasing customer, buy what you need and don't expect to easily put in cheaper components to do upgrades on your own. Insides are not designed to be accessed by the end user. If you want to buy the base model and upgrade, you need to factor in the cost of a trusted and trained certified tech to do the work. Ones employed by Apple likely will refuse. Still if this all holds true on release of product, you won't be stuck if you under specify and need more RAM or SSD later on. Processor might be socketed too, but not clear yet what they are planning there. For a relatively low volume product, it makes sense to have only one motherboard common across all options and plug in the options as needed.

 

[thebmall]

Another Day One Purchaser here. I am a videographer and the iMac hits the sweet spot for me. I am fine with the AIO design as I buy a new iMac at the end of the three year AppleCare, by then there is enough improvement to justify the upgrade.

The configuration that appeals to me is: 10 core, 64GB Ram, 2TB SSD, max GPU.

Yeah, but how much is that configuration going to cost? That's my main problem. Pouring so much money into an all-in-one non-upgradeable machine seems crazy. It's why I decided to get a regular imac for the time being and hopefully update if Mac ever decides to actually redo the Mac Pro properly.

 

[driftless]

My guess is $9,400.00.

Edit: if you take the 12 core MP with keyboard and trackpad, bump the RAM to 64GB, add 1TB SSD plus another $1,200.00 (based on the the iMac configurator), plus another $1,300.00 for a LG 5K monitor you are at ~ $9,700.00. That is as close to apples to apples as I can figure. I expect the new nMP to be substantially more powerful and expensive when it is introduced next year. I think that the configuration that I listed for the iMac Pro, 10 core, 64GB RAM, max GPU, 2TB SSD, is where there will be the most overlap between the current nMP and the iMac Pro when they exist in the market at the same. I think that both configurations are ideal for videographers.

 

[throAU]

throAU, I agree with you, but don't you think that TB3 is still quite limited in a future standpoint?
40 Gbps is impressive for many applications, but when it comes to high-end GPUs, the buses found on motherboards are much faster. Don't you think that someone who buys an iMP would choose a faster GPU than the included Vega after a few years and find that it can be used with a lower performance than if it were installed in the actual mac?

Nevertheless, the iMP has RAM slots and I think (I might be mistaken) that the CPU is socketed. Not fully expandable in traditional terms, but still there is room for growth if you take into account a higher price and longer times (since I guess the majority of users will rely on service centres to upgrade it, I personally wouldn't risk wrecking the screen).

If your application is hitting the PCIe bus constantly, you will take a huge performance hit whether or not it is on a slot or on the end of a thunderbolt cable.

This is why VRAM on the card exists.

Thunderbolt will get faster, however it has been usable for EGPUs for about 5+ years at this point.

 

[askunk]

Maybe I didn't make myself clear. PCI-E 3.0 reaches about 256 Gbps, while PCI-E 512 Gbps. Any future card you might want to add to an iMP would be more powerful than a Vega, which means very likely that it will have a high bandwidth workflow, exploiting fully PCI-E.

Today you can add power to a MBP with a e-GPU on TB3 and see an improvement, but I seriously doubt that your money would be well spent with an ...1180 Nvidia or an AMD Vega 2 card in a TB3 enclosure. At least if you're looking to improve performance on an iMP.